Can You Be A True Fundamentalist and not care about being called a fundamentalist?
Forum category
Poll Results
Can You Be A True Fundamentalist and not care about being called a fundamentalist?
Yes, Some fundamentaltists do not call themselvers fundamentalist. Votes: 20
Yes, Some fundamentalists do not WANT to be called fundamentalist Votes: 10
Yes, many are fundamentalists but do not know it because they define fundamentalism differently than SI Votes: 4
No, a true fundamentalist is proud of the label Votes: 2
No, part of being a fundamentalist is identifying with a movement Votes: 1
Other Votes: 1
The word “fundamentalist” means so many things, it is futile to discuss Votes: 8
I intended for poll voters to be entitled to more than one option. Apparently either the new SI format does not allow this or I did not find the option. Sorry about that.
What sparked this poll was the article about whether Southern Baptists are fundamentalists.
What sparked this poll was the article about whether Southern Baptists are fundamentalists.
"The Midrash Detective"
Some people are fundamentalist and do not use the term and opt for another without deliberation against the fundamentalist term. Rather they chose simply in favor of another but qualify as a fundamentalist and some are fundamentalist but do not WANT to use the label since it has been scarred at times by our own brethren BUT at times by the world (cosmos diabolicus) which has intentionally vilified it.
Technically, should not anybody who holds to “the fundamentals” and is willing to fight for them be a Fundamentalist? Thus, many are fundamentalists who are not part of the “movement.”
I’m tired of hearing “so-and-so isn’t a true fundamentalist because he does ____.”
The question is, does he hold to the fundamentals and fight for them? If so, we ought to give leniency in other “non-fundamental” areas. After all, isn’t that what Fundamentalism was originally about?
I’m tired of hearing “so-and-so isn’t a true fundamentalist because he does ____.”
The question is, does he hold to the fundamentals and fight for them? If so, we ought to give leniency in other “non-fundamental” areas. After all, isn’t that what Fundamentalism was originally about?
[Brian Jo] Technically, should not anybody who holds to “the fundamentals” and is willing to fight for them be a Fundamentalist? Thus, many are fundamentalists who are not part of the “movement.”Amen! I could not agree more completely. Preach it!!!
I’m tired of hearing “so-and-so isn’t a true fundamentalist because he does ____.”
The question is, does he hold to the fundamentals and fight for them? If so, we ought to give leniency in other “non-fundamental” areas. After all, isn’t that what Fundamentalism was originally about?
"The Midrash Detective"
I don’t think that the SBC would consider themselves fundamentalists….
I asked someone (outside of the SBC in another denomination) if they considered themselves a fundamentalist and they said that it depends on how you define the terms.
Unfortunately, when people hear the term fundamentalist, they often think of legalistic dress standards, hair standards, and extreme separation instead of the fundamentals of the faith and the reason why fundamentalism was started. Fundamentalism started out well and has drifted away from its original moorings of old.
In many ways, the SBC could be considered more conservative than some fundamentalists….
Chew on that one while!
I asked someone (outside of the SBC in another denomination) if they considered themselves a fundamentalist and they said that it depends on how you define the terms.
Unfortunately, when people hear the term fundamentalist, they often think of legalistic dress standards, hair standards, and extreme separation instead of the fundamentals of the faith and the reason why fundamentalism was started. Fundamentalism started out well and has drifted away from its original moorings of old.
In many ways, the SBC could be considered more conservative than some fundamentalists….
Chew on that one while!
Discussion